PubMed | Georgia College & State University, University of Houston, University of Minnesota and Catholic University of AmericaType: Journal Article | Journal: Mindfulness | Year: 2015

Mindfulness-based strategies have received empirical support for improving coping with stress and reducing alcohol use. The present study presents a moderated mediation model to explain how mindfulness might promote healthier drinking patterns. This model posits that mindfulness reduces perceived stress, leading to less alcohol use, and also weakens the linkage between stress and alcohol use. African American smokers (

Researchers often require and collect sensitive information about individuals to answer important scientific questions that impact individual health and well-being and the public health. Researchers recognize they have a duty to maintain the confidentiality of the data they collect and typically make promises, which are documented in the consent form. The legal interests of others, however, can threaten researchers promises of confidentiality, if they seek access to the data through subpoena. Certificates of Confidentiality (Certificates), authorized by federal statute, are an important tool for protecting individually identifiable sensitive research data from compelled disclosure. However, questions persist in the research community about the strength of Certificate protections, and the evidence on which to judge the strength is scant. In this article, we address those questions through a careful examination of the legislation and regulations concerning Certificates and the reported and unreported cases we have identified through our legal research and interviews with legal counsel about their experiences with Certificates. We also analyze other statutes that protect research data to compare them to the Certificates protections, and we review other legal strategies available for protecting research data. Based on our analysis, we conclude with recommendations for how to strengthen protection of sensitive research data.

The federal Certificate of Confidentiality plays an important role in research on sensitive topics by authorizing researchers to refuse to disclose identifiable research data in response to subpoenas in any legal setting. However, there is little known about how effective Certificates are in practice. This article draws on our legal and empirical research on this topic to fill this information gap. It includes a description of the purpose of Certificates, their legislative and regulatory history, and a summary of the few reported and unreported cases that have dealt with Certificates. In addition, we outline other statutory confidentiality protections, compare them to the Certificates protections, and analyze some of the vulnerabilities of a Certificates protections. This analysis allows us to make specific recommendations for strengthening the protections afforded to research data.

Pubic hair grooming and removal are common behaviors among men and women. However, little is known about the reasons for grooming, preferred pubic hairstyle of sexual partners, and symptoms associated with regular grooming.This study aims to assess pubic hair removal/grooming practices, pubic hairstyle preferences, and genital outcomes associated with pubic hair removal among men and women in a college sample.Data were gathered from 1,110 participants (671 women and 439 men) at a large public Midwestern university and a small Southern public university.Items assessed demographics, pubic hair grooming and removal practices in the past 4 weeks, reasons for pubic hair status, preference for pubic hairstyle of sexual partners, and symptoms associated with removal and grooming.Most (95%) participants had removed their pubic hair on at least one occasion in the past 4 weeks with shaving being the most commonly reported hair removal technique by women (82%) and men (49%). Women were significantly more likely to report their typical status as hair-free (50% vs. 19%; (2)=165.528, P<0.001) and men were significantly more likely to prefer a hair-free sexual partner (60% vs. 24%; (2)=211.712, P<0.001). Genital itching was experienced on at least one occasion by 80.3% of pubic hair groomers and was the most commonly reported side effect.Genital grooming and pubic hair removal are common practices among both men and women of college-age. Women are likely to report stronger associations with feelings of cleanliness, comfort, sex appeal, social norms of their peer group, and affordability as reasons for their chosen pubic hair style. Women also report more experiences with genital side effects of pubic hair removal, an expected result as women are removing pubic hair more frequently and more completely than their male counterparts.